Information Technology Reference
In-Depth Information
Ta b l e 5 . System on the iPad
Ta b l e 6 . Google on the iPad
#Question
v.good good avg. poor
#Question
v.good good avg. poor
results first sight
43%
38% 20%
-
results first sight
55%
40% 15%
-
query answered
65%
20% 15%
-
query answered
71%
29%
-
-
interesting facts
62%
24% 10% 4%
interesting facts
33%
33% 33%
-
suprising facts
66%
15% 13% 6%
suprising facts
33%
-
-
66%
overall feeling
54%
28% 14% 4%
overall feeling
33%
50% 17% 4%
Ta b l e 7 . System on the iPhone
Ta b l e 8 . Google on the iPhone
#Question
v.good good avg. poor
#Question
v.good good avg. poor
results first sight
31%
46% 23%
-
results first sight
23%
63%
7%
7%
query answered
70%
20% 10%
-
query answered
70%
20% 10%
-
interesting facts
45%
36% 19%
-
interesting facts
33%
33% 33%
-
suprising facts
56%
22% 11% 11%
suprising facts
36%
-
27% 37%
overall feeling
25%
67%
8%
-
overall feeling
25%
33% 33% 9%
After each task, both testers had to rate several statements on a Likert scale and a
general questionnaire had to be filled out after completing the entire test. The tables 5,
6, 7, and 8 show the overall result.
The results show that people prefer the result representation and accuracy in the
Google style when using the iPad. Especially for the general themes the presentation
of web snippets is more convenient and easier to understand. The iPhone-testers could
be divided into two groups: in case they were unfamiliar with smartphones the testers
preferred our system because it needs much less user interaction and the result are
more readable. Testers being familiar with smartphones again prefered the Google style
mainly because they are used to it.
However, when it comes to interesting and suprising facts users enjoyed exploring
the results using the topic graph (iPad) or the navigation based representation (iPhone/
iPod). The overall feeling was in favor of our system which might also be due to the
fact that it is new and somewhat more playful.
The replies to the final questions: How successful were you from your point of view?
What did you like most/least;? What could be improved? were informative and con-
tained positive feedback. Users felt they had been successful using the system. They
liked the paradigm of the explorative search on the iPad and preferred touching the
graph instead of reformulating their queries. For the iPhone they prefered the result
representation in our system in general and there have been useful comments for im-
proving it. One main issue is the need of a summary or a more knowledge based answer
to the search query as Google often does it by offering a direct link to wikipedia as a
first search result. This will be part of our future research.
Search WWH ::




Custom Search